AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Defendant, Earnest Frolick, was convicted for distribution of a controlled substance. He appealed the conviction, arguing that the jury should have been instructed on objective entrapment.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of San Juan County, John A. Dean Jr., District Judge, February 16, 2016: Conviction for one count of distribution of a controlled substance.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant: Argued that the district court erred by not instructing the jury on objective entrapment.
• Appellee: After consideration, chose not to file a memorandum in opposition to the appellant's argument regarding the jury instruction on objective entrapment.

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in denying the Defendant's request for the jury to be instructed on objective entrapment.

Disposition

• The conviction for one count of distribution of a controlled substance was reversed, and the case was remanded to the district court for a new trial.

Reasons

• Per Jonathan B. Sutin, with James J. Wechsler and J. Miles Hanisee concurring, the appellate court decided to reverse the Defendant's conviction and remand for a new trial based on the district court's error in denying the request for a jury instruction on objective entrapment. The decision was influenced by the State's choice not to oppose the Defendant's argument regarding the jury instruction on objective entrapment (para 1).